12 Things You Need to Know About the Uprising in Wisconsin

Originally posted by apacheman
If Wisconsin needs more money, then raise business taxes and taxes on the rich: make them pay for the privilege of doing business in the state instead
of paying them to take money out of it.

If you feel you're underpaid, overworked and lack bennies compared to government workers, then demand more from your boss, not that others be paid
less to share your misery.

But you can't can you?

He'd laugh and replace you for making ridiculous demands because you have no union to back you up.

Every boss I ever worked for whined about how labor costs were killing him and taxes were driving him to ruin. Never mind the big house, several cars,
the boat, the vacation house, and the frequent getaways. Of course they were also usually in hock past their eyeballs, living far beyond their means,
demanding more from their workers to pay for it. One boss seriously advised me to make sure I never invested my own money in a business, but rather
arrange loans as much as possible, because when the business soured (as most do), i could walk away clean in bankruptcy and start another the same
way.

Business men delude themselves about their worth and competence every day: they are not near as skillful and smart as they like to think, and business
practices applied to government nearly always end in corruption and failure because government is not a business, and can't be run like
one.

The business mindset is far too narrow and petty to succeed were broad vision, long-term planning and execution, and balance are required. By their
nature and training, business types have selfish goals, narrow interests, short attention spans and are too ruthless to be trusted with public monies
or policies. Too many believ as Lee Iaccocca did, that's what's good for them is good for the country very few to none will do the right thing if it
personally costs them money, even if it's best for the country.

edit on 20-2-2011 by apacheman because: (no reason given)

Your comments: If Wisconsin needs more money, then raise business taxes and taxes on the rich: make them pay for the privilege of doing business in the state
instead of paying them to take money out of it.

Nice, drive what is left of your businesses to other states or even better China. Why do we even have minimum wage laws, etc. If a company can move
it's operations overseas, pay slave labor wages of $4 a day, pay nothing for benefits, Social Security, and health coverage AND THEN sell that product
from China in the US with no penalty? It is foolish. We need taxes and it is time to address the real issues... Fair Trade TARIFF! They have NO
problems Tariffing us and limiting how much we can import, and or making a US company give 51% interest or stake to a "national" company. We have Free
Trade alright.... Free for them, not for us. Tax the "rich". OK, this isn't 1930 anymore. Go ahead and tax more and see how fast they take their money
and business with them to a foreign country. We have the 2nd highest corporate tax in the world. It is a miracle we have anything but service jobs
that require feet on the ground here.

If you feel you're underpaid, overworked and lack bennies compared to government workers, then demand more from your boss, not that others be paid
less to share your misery.

Actually, I don't feel underpaid but I sure as hell don't want to pay for "Someone Else's" sweet benefit package by being taxed more when there is
almost NO U.S. company who could even OFFER such benefits without going out of business. Not to mention WHO they are getting these benefits
from....Collective Bargaining against The Taxpayer. What is so special about a Government Job that "Demands" such an entitlement package that could
never be available to those 80% or more who actually have to work and be competitive in the private work force? Why does this Union force dues like a
shakedown that funds a political party?

Why is this Union entitled to taxpayer money in the form of mandatory dues from taxpayer funded salaries? And what are those dues used for? To support
a "political party". As with "Corporate Welfare" recipients donating to their favorite politicians, this is the same thing and should be illegal. What
"entitles" this Union to mandatory donations in the form of dues from Taxpayer funded salaries, thus taxpayer funded Union?

Also, If "THEY" are involved in the SAME retirement accounts that WE are then they will be less apt to try and confiscate them.

You do realize that these government employee union members are taxpayers Themselves?

You do understand that these government employee union members have, for the most part, accepted lower wages (as compared to market rates for
similar positions) in return for improved job security, benefits, and a secure retirement?

You do understand that, when you force someone who is already earning less than his/her peers to also begin to pay
MORE for his/her benefits and retirement, you are actually harming that person more than you yourself would find acceptable?

I find it odd that those who do not work in public service are seemingly always eager to claim that government employees are "Our" servants; and yet
they are so willing to heap scorn and retribution on those same "servants".

And then they have the unmitigated hypocrisy to rail at the "sense of entiltlement" public employees exhibit!

If the rich want to leave because of taxation, fine by me. They can leave their citizenship on the way out, and their right to do business in or with
the US with it. We're better off without them. Enjoy life elsewhere.

Why would offering decent wages and fair benefits break a company who pays multi-million bonusses to the execs? Just trim their bonusses to tens of
thousands instead, pay the employees more and they will buy more of your products, unless, of course, you produce useless crap and they know it.

Engaging in business is not a "free" right, it is subject to the rules we choose to put on it to ensure the common good. Rules for worker safety,
product safety, environmental safety.

The best businessman I ever knew didn't care one whit about taxes and he paid a fair wage, well above what he had to. He felt that any entrepreneur
worth his salt could find a way to be profitable no matter what the rules or taxes were by creating good products and adding value. Only poor
businessmen whine about taxes and wages. The only thing he asked was not to change the rules constantly.

Government retirement packages are usually meant to compensate for lack of Social Security (most government employees aren't covered by it) and lower
earnings.

Teachers especially are put upon, far too many people think that the "joy of teaching" should be ample reward in itself. If that is the case, CEOs
should be paid minimum wage, since success and the sheer joy of running a business should be sufficient compensation.

Teaching is hard, difficult, and highly skilled work, even when done poorly. It takes at least four years to properly season a teacher and develop all
the different skillsets required. Even when done well, critics who couldn't teach a duck to swim want to reduce their pay.

If you want to go pay for performance, how about this? Pay each teacher a retirement based on a percentage of the lifetime income of all the students
they've taught, minus an equal percentage of the costs associated with the ones who go to jail. I'm pretty sure that would make for a lot of rich
retired teachers.

The problem with teaching is that it is more like farming than manufacturing. Most students are like trees and take years to bloom and produce: do you
reward the person who planted the tree, the one who fed, trimmed, and nurtured it, or the one who was around when it finally bloomed? Each was
necessary and contributed to the end result.

Too many of our politicians think only in inappropriate business terms when dealing with the issues of governance, which is why I assert they are too
narrow to qualify for the positions. the business model, if such a thing actually exists, is a very poor one for government, but it's the only game
they know or are willing to learn, so they keep trying to force the same failed ideas to work in different places hoping for a different outcome,
instead of growing with the job and leaving their business methods and thinking where they belong: in the business world.

It's at least been processed by photo editing software, according to JPEGsnoop. And beyond that, look at the woman holding the sign----why is she
facing a totally different direction than all of the other protesters? And even more, image error analysis shows serious processing:
forensic error analysis of the photo (the highly processed areas show up in
orange/yellow).

And yeah, I found those sources for the photos----and the IOTW site gives no original source for them. That picture is not on any credible site I can
find. I found another page with spelling mistakes in the Wisconsin signs, but this was not on there.

You do realize that these government employee union members are taxpayers Themselves?

In a way yes, but if I am payed 100% by the Taxpayer and give 25% some of it back, I am still being payed 75% of my Salary directly by the Taxpayer.
And let's not forget the Taxpayer money that gets handed over to the Union in the form of mandatory Union Dues to pay their salaries on that taxpayer
dime and that get used for political donations.

You do understand that these government employee union members have, for the most part, accepted lower wages (as compared to market rates for
similar positions) in return for improved job security, benefits, and a secure retirement?

The average federal employee's benefits add $40,785 to his annual total compensation, whereas the average working taxpayer's benefits increase
his total compensation by only $9,881. In other words, federal workers are paid on average salaries that are twice as generous as those in the private
sector, and they receive benefits that are four times greater.

•Benefits. Federal workers received average benefits worth $41,791 in 2009. Most of this was the government's contribution to pensions. Employees
contributed an additional $10,569.

•Pay. The average federal salary has grown 33% faster than inflation since 2000. USA TODAY reported in March that the federal government pays an
average of 20% more than private firms for comparable occupations. The analysis did not consider differences in experience and education.

•Total compensation. Federal compensation has grown 36.9% since 2000 after adjusting for inflation, compared with 8.8% for private workers.

Sorry, those are unsupported assertions made by a right-wing rag without any proof to back them up.

You really need to think more critically: do you really beleive an average federal worker gets over $40K a year in bennies? Probably only if
you include Senators and Congressmen, since technically they are federal employees, too.. And the military skews the numbers if you count the
healthcare necessary after losing limbs in combat.

In any case federal workers are not state workers and state workers' packages vary wildly.

You have to pick apart the stats and see who they are including as an "average federal worker".

I know it's hard work to pick through the stats and actually think about these things rather than parrot talking points, but it really is
worth it, and necessary to understand what is going on.

This is absolutely nothing less than a war of the have vs the have nots, or in many cases the have littles.

They are coming for your pensions now, your savings and retirements, your life support money.

How anyone could be an average working class American citizen and speak against your own countrymen unionizing is beyond me. Not because some
political party says so, but because fighting against your unionized brothers and sisters is counter productive and against YOUR best interest.

The Republican party has the typical American conservative so ass backwards in their thinking that they rail against things like union guaranteed
wages and free health care. I always want to yell out "but it will help you also you poor fools"...but alas Fox news has a powerful grip on these
people.

They teach poor people to hate other poor people for not wanting to remain poor and underclass. The irony is overwhelming.

Wow! Too bad that the Ezra Klein and Rachel Maddow stories have been proven to be FALSE. But, this is par for the course for progressive demagogues
and their ATS lackeys who cherry-pick facts to suit their agenda.

According to "Politifact, the truth is a little bit different:

the remainder of the routine memo -- consider it the fine print -- outlines $258 million in unpaid bills or expected shortfalls in programs
such as Medicaid services for the needy ($174 million alone), the public defender’s office and corrections. Additionally, the state owes Minnesota
$58.7 million under a discontinued tax reciprocity deal.

Sadly for the working people of Wisconsin, the projected deficit is actually likely to be much higher (again, according to Politifact):

We were curious about claims of a surplus based on the fiscal bureau memo.

In writing it when it was released, reporters from the Journal Sentinel and Associated Press had put the shortfall at between $78 million and $340
million. That’s the projection for the end of the fiscal year, June 30, 2011.
Walker himself has settled on $137 million as the deficit figure, a number reporters have adopted as shorthand.
... It would be closer to the $340 million figure if the figure included the $200 million owed to the state’s patient compensation fund, a
debt courts have declared resulted from an illegal raid on the fund under former Gov. Jim Doyle.

Never mind that the business incentives do not even come into play in the current budget, such things as facts would only get in the way of a great
opportunity to smear a conservative governor:

Meanwhile, what about Maddow’s claim -- also repeated across the liberal blogosphere -- that Walker’s tax-cut bills approved in January
are responsible for the $137 million deficit?

The tax cuts will cost the state a projected $140 million in tax revenue -- but not until the next two-year budget, from July 2011 to June 2013.
The cuts are not even in effect yet, so they cannot be part of the current problem.

Oh, maybe I should add that since he was called on it, Ezra Klein has retracted his allegations!

Update: I've been persuaded that the surplus-to-deficit picture is more complicated that I initially understood.
...
The $130 million deficit now projected for 2011 isn't the fault of the tax breaks passed during Walker's special session ...
.

You do understand that these government employee union members have, for the most part, accepted lower wages (as compared to market rates
for similar positions) in return for improved job security, benefits, and a secure retirement?

You do understand that, when you force someone who is already earning less than his/her peers to also begin to pay MORE for his/her benefits and
retirement, you are actually harming that person more than you yourself would find acceptable?

Actually, these union members, largely teachers, average over $100,000/year in salary. Far above their private counterparts.

Actually, these union members currently do not pay ANYTHING toward retirement, but are being asked to contribute 8% of wages toward retirement and
health care, while the private sector pay an average of 29%.

Actually, these union members have civil service-type job protection, that way they can just leave their jobs to protest and use false doctor excuses
without fear of termination, while private sector employees cannot.

Actually, these union members will still have collective bargaining rights for their already-inflated wages, they just won't be able to walk off the
job anymore to whine about having to pay less than 1/3 of what their private sector counterparts do for lesser benefits.

As someone who was brought up to "hate the unions...." maybe you can rectify some of my beliefs. Unions, we've been taught, are corrupt. They
are corrupt, are they not? Here are some other little facts I've been "taught to believe...."

UNIONS are largely responsible for the outsourcing of labor to foreign countries. Biggest gripe I have, but read on.

The decline of unions is a long time coming. Labour unions introduce rigidity into labor markets. Increasing wages above the market rate actually
increases long-term unemployment.

It is difficult to fire incompetent workers and reward ones who perform exceptionally well. This can distort incentives in the labor market.

Unions have declined largely because they have become less relevant in a global economy. Middle class workers are more likely to be employed by small
service firms.

Unions have negotiated benefits in excess of company profits so much so that the airlines have had to declare bankruptcy and divest themselves of
their pension obligations in order to stay in business.

Unions, through these ridiculously high wages for unskilled labor, exacerbate the demand for illegal alien labor.

Do you need me to go on, or is this enough?

People in Wisconsin: Buck up! Take your signs and go home! We're all struggling right now. The Government is not your Daddy.

Well of course. It really depresses me what happened to the right wing in this country because I used to consider myself a right-winger. That was
decades ago.

Now I see the right wing as gullible, stupid and emotional instead of logical. Wisconsin perfectly explains my mindset.

This is straight out of the Reagan playbook. PREACH the evil of deficits. Then create an EVEN BIGGER deficit. BLAME the political opposition for
the bigger deficit. Then hope people will be stupid enough to believe the cause is the political opposition's programs.

BTW, right wing people are going to completely ignore this quote from the article:

"At the beginning of this year, the state was on course to end 2011 with a budget surplus of $120 million. As Ezra Klein explained, newly elected GOP
Governor Scott Walker then " signed two business tax breaks and a conservative health-care policy experiment that lowers overall tax revenues."

Originally posted by reluctantpawn
The issue I have with unionized govt workers is this. You work for the people that pay taxes. You do not work for a for profit corporation. When the
taxpayer [that is me] runs out of money by losing his job, there is no one to pay taxes. Since no one can pay their fair share of taxes govt spending
must be cut. Govt cuts spending by cutting pay and benefits to balance the budget. Perhaps the governor should do like Reagan did and fire all of you.
I am sure there are many qualified college graduates that would love to have a 100k a year job with benefits. Without the union.As a taxpayer I would
love to see my dollar used to get the best bang for the buck. That usually means getting rid of those not doing their jobs and supporting those that
do. It is funny that since teachers have unionized money spent per student has gone up and is more than any other nation on earth, while the level of
education the students receive has continued to plummet. Tie salary to performance and bring back discipline to the classroom and we might be able to
go somewhere.

reluctantpawn

Agreed!

This debacle has also been tied to the Wall Street meltdown. It is but not in the all encompassing way that's been portrayed. Not everyone in the
private sector works for or benefited from an investment house, bank or a mortgage company. The entire private sector did not benefit from the
profiteering. The false profits and economic bubble skipped most of those in the private sector. I have not received so much as cost of living
increases in 7 years and took a 12% pay reduction in January of 2010 so that no one was laid off. That's collective bargaining. We gave back so
fellow employees could continue to work. No union involved. No greed involved. I pay for 50% of my meager health care plan and have for 20 years.
12.6% of a "Cadillac plan"? I would sign for that in a heartbeat but that would put the business I work for under. 5.8% of pensions? What pension? I
will receive the same non-existent social security plus whatever I've saved. Work 9 months? For $89,000 and then have a three month summer position?
Every half-baked holiday off? Teacher's conferences held during the work week? Sick leave and personal days out the wazoo? Any unused days to be
accumulated and paid at a higher wage rate on retirement? Master's degree to teach grammar school at exorbitant pay scales? And you've all seen
that. That's the bulk of these teachers. Are there exceptions? Sure but they're not in this picketing mob. This group can't come to grips with the
"gravy train" being over while most of the country has never seen the train. Too bad for them that their precious school systems never taught the
value of frugality, restraint and self-reliance. Luckily for them they are teachers as they will need re-education. It's going to be a hard landing
the likes only 10% of the work force have experienced.

Those that benefited from the economic bubble threw some of their bubble gains into their public school systems. It made them look more intelligent
and less greedy in their McMansions. Voting pro education budget every time. "What's more important than educating our children?" Nothing of course
but they made school systems into country club babysitters. Lacrosse anyone? (Just one, pick your own educational indulgence!) Now these stiffs have
lost their bubble jobs, downsized and moved to cheaper pastures. Leaving towns floundering and their former neighbors still working non-bubble jobs
paying for the liberal excesses with smaller tax bases. And we will! The corrective measures will be taken, the costs will be reigned in, the public
sector jobs will be cut to adjust for the flight of the bubble people. Many of us were not here for the short term gains. Over building lots in long
established communities waiting for the chance to dump and move up. Borrowing against non-existent equity. That's how Wall Street drove this and many
of us noticed all along. Money from nothing. This is not a new revelation. We saw the same on a smaller scale with the tech bubble before it. Many
don't learn, greed rules.

To what end with all of these wonderful, selfless educators? Educating our children to do what? Be the best educated unemployed work force on the
planet? To be ready for the jobs of the future while no one can predict what those jobs will entail? I've got government run health care and
retirement plans to sell you all.

When I heard about this on the news, I wondered how the hell the Unions would get people on their side. Well, thanks for answering that question. I
certainly didn't see this argument coming. They really are quite clever.

Never-mind the fact that Union State workers haven't had to suffer this economy the way the private sector has. While the private sector was losing
it's pensions, receiving lay-offs and pay cuts, State workers continued to enjoy their plush salaries, paid holidays, assured they'd keep their fat
pensions and wouldn't ever have to pay a penny toward their healthcare till the day they died. All financed by you and me, the tax payer. I don't
care what the Governor did or didn't do in regard to tax breaks and the like. That's a separate issue. Even if that were not an issue, I'd still
want Government workers to be treated like the rest of us, because WE pay their salaries. I think it's ridiculous that they should have so many perks
pushing paper around while we slave away trying to pay taxes to keep them alive. It's time they paid a little into their own health care. It's time
they sacrificed a little so that the rest of us didn't have to carry such a burden during these hard times.

Great post my friend.The masses comlpetely forgot who fought and died for the simple work standards we have now.The unions are not the enemy here.They
are fighting for all working class people to keep wages up for everyone.Union wages fall that means all wages fall and holiday pay,40hr work weeks,ot
pay will follow.All union haters wake up and realize what your screaming for becoause your just steping on your own toes.Man its amazing how
powerfull propaganda is.Read between the lines people.Our working rights are at stake.

Once the unions are gone it's over. maybe it has to happen for things to actually change. I don't know....but I don't think what is happening can
be stopped.

I don't think anyone has ANY problems with the idea of Unions existing. The problem most people see with Unions is that they have gotten too greedy!
They want more and more and more, until it's unsustainable, especially in times like these. They don't look at the big picture, they only make sure
that THEIR pockets are packed. Well, our pockets are now empty, and it's time for them to put together an agreement that would help all of us
survive. Of course they don't care about us. They care only about themselves. "Deficit? What's that? Hand over the cash."

If you feel you're underpaid, overworked and lack bennies compared to government workers, then demand more from your boss, not that others be paid
less to share your misery.

I am the boss of the government workers and I say you're fired! Next!

Originally posted by infolurker

Nice, drive what is left of your businesses to other states or even better China. Why do we even have minimum wage laws, etc. If a company can move
it's operations overseas, pay slave labor wages of $4 a day, pay nothing for benefits, Social Security, and health coverage AND THEN sell that
product from China in the US with no penalty? It is foolish. We need taxes and it is time to address the real issues... Fair Trade TARIFF! They have
NO problems Tariffing us and limiting how much we can import, and or making a US company give 51% interest or stake to a "national" company. We have
Free Trade alright.... Free for them, not for us. Tax the "rich". OK, this isn't 1930 anymore. Go ahead and tax more and see how fast they take
their money and business with them to a foreign country. We have the 2nd highest corporate tax in the world. It is a miracle we have anything but
service jobs that require feet on the ground here.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.